Of course. Consider that most usage surveys show that iDevices get used on the Internet far more than Android devices. If the customer buys an iPhone, the carrier will actually have to earn its money. If they buy an Android phone, they collect the fees, but the phone isn't tying up the network.
There are plenty of ways to use data besides surfing the web. In fact that is probably one of the least data intensive ways to use a smartphone. Most of my data is probably from listening to spotify and pandora in my car while driving for example. Many games and other apps can also chew through data far more than just browsing the web.
It makes sense that these salespeople push Samsung. A larger commission is probably a major reason, but phone geeks are going to be naturally drawn to Android just because there is so much you can do in terms of customization. Not to mention the rooting and custom ROMs. The iPhone and iOS work well for what they do, but doesn't tend to appeal to phone geeks. I enjoyed custom ROMs when I had my HTC EVO, but grew tired of it after a while but still see the appeal to others. Jailbreaking is much easier than rooting, but when 6.1 is finally released I will do it again because I miss all that flexibility and features not available of vanilla iOS.
So what, you ask? That very much depends on whether you are interested in stock prices or in quality products. And, if you ARE interested only in stock prices, are you interested in the long term or in the easily-manipulated short term?
I want Apple to have a CEO who is interested in quality products and long-term stock performance. Not in playing the game of lies you say Tim was "napping" on. I say that because quality products matter to me, and I'd say the same if I were shareholder, because I'd be investing for the long term, not playing the silly, irrational quarter-to-quarter game.
And if you look at the numbers, you'll be surprised to see that Apple's market share is doing great, their profit share is doing better, and their buyer satisfaction numbers are simply untouchable.
People would be naive to think that quality products and short term stock performance have no serious relationships. People need to realize, quality products don't come out just because a few very smart people sit together and create it. Incentives plays a huge part. If you're working for AAPL and you see the stock tumbled in a matter of months, your work ethics could be affected, your concentration could be affected, in fact you might even look for a new job. The whole company's productivity is in fact a function of the stock price (yes even in the short-term).
And yet, the iPhone 5 is still outselling the S3. Pretty incredible, seeing the disparity in the marketing of both phones, and how ahrd the S3 is being pushed by absolutely everyone.
In retail, higher commission is the single most powerful motivator for recommending one product over another. In a commoditized market like the PC's, manufacturers used all kinds of tactics to win market share: including higher margin or increased incentive to move a certain number of units. Some retailer even took $200 off a PC for signing up for two years of AOL. Many PC manufacturers gained market share in the short term but eventually went out of business or got bought out.
1990s references have little relevance today. They could have better retail margins as you mentioned. Maybe very little profit is there at the retail level on the iphone. We haven't seen what they pay wholesale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
Spifs and OEM kickbacks talk loudly. Apple does not play that game much. Samsung heavily.
If MS still wants to play in this game, they should consider it.
Your assumptions are stupid as they're assumptions. All it takes is greater profit at the retail level to make them push it. If it didn't meet the standards of the retail establishment, they wouldn't even carry the device. If you're buying through a carrier store, they're likely to push models within a class of products that aren't as heavily subsidized. In this case smartphones are the product class. If something is labeled as a smartphone in the US, you're locked into a data plan with the contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo
And so what if Samsung used cheater tactics?
What even constitutes a cheater tactic? There are many potential reasons. What if they use the iphone to drive foot traffic but the actual sale delivers little profit for the retailer? Would you still expect them to push it once you're in the store? Not everything has to be a huge conspiracy. It could be any combination of things.
Of course. Consider that most usage surveys show that iDevices get used on the Internet far more than Android devices. If the customer buys an iPhone, the carrier will actually have to earn its money. If they buy an Android phone, they collect the fees, but the phone isn't tying up the network.
iMessage is actually a money maker for UK telcos due to increased data usage and overcharges. UK smartphone tariffs generally come with thousands or unlimited SMS bundles.
This could that there are warehouses filled with Samsung devices which the carriers struggle to even give away. I know that on Thursday last week there were 50+ Samsung s3 handsets in stock at my local car phone warehouse vs 16 iPhone 5.
[RIGHT][/RIGHT]This is a lie. We all know people bought Samsung because they love Android (and iOS is stale of course). Salesman has nothing to do with it.
And yet, the iPhone 5 is still outselling the S3. Pretty incredible, seeing the disparity in the marketing of both phones, and how ahrd the S3 is being pushed by absolutely everyone.
Great. Since the iPhone is so cheap that anyone can have one nowadays, if only the tech-savvy elite knows enough to buy one, it will remain an elite product! /s
Well they know how to design 'all' of Apple's products (Jonathan Ive)... as well as inventing the world wide web that you used to post that comment (Tim Berners-Lee)... the electricity that powers your computer (Michael Faraday)... and computers in general (Charles Babbage / Alan Turing).
So the big test is to see which of these stores pass the commission money onto their employees. I know that John Lewis's employees don't work on a commission basis. I'm not entirely sure about the rest - CPW definitely used to but I'm not sure if they still do.
I think it's more likely that the Samsung Galaxy III is what "phone geeks" like to use. I see it a lot of smartphone forums. If you're obsessed with smartphones (and you're being paid pretty poorlY) Android is attractive. It's a lot more customisable than the iPhone 5.
Huh, that "survey" was made over eight (8) stores on London's Oxford Street: it has no scientific/statistical -neither newsworthy- value in anyway....
Moreover the press release is also saying:
"These results echo a mystery shopper survey which was conducted last summer across five sales outlets located in the Silicon Valley, California area. The results from that survey revealed that the best-represented brands, in terms of prominent displays, were Samsung and HTC. When it came to mobile phones recommended by the sales assistants in the various stores, Samsung was by far the best-represented vendor (...)"
So I can't wait to read the usual highly pondered and factual people speaking about the "anti-Apple sentiment" in California...
In the US you don't need a survey. Just walk into a busy iPhone carrier (AT&T, Verizon) and ask them what they recommend or listen to what they recommend to others.
So painfully reminiscent of the early '90s, where in the few stores that sold Macs and PCs the salespeople would systematically steer Mac customers towards a PC because they were getting big commissions and incentives for selling PCs, and virtually nothing for selling Macs.
Apple's choice then to prioritize margins over market share backfired: PCs eventually gathered enough market share that the Mac became practically extinct and software was no longer developed for it.
I'm not saying that it's what's happening to Apple right now; but if they're not careful, it could very well happen soon. Watch out for "Android first" apps.
Sorry, but your history of personal computing is fiction, wildly inventive fiction.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Of course. Consider that most usage surveys show that iDevices get used on the Internet far more than Android devices. If the customer buys an iPhone, the carrier will actually have to earn its money. If they buy an Android phone, they collect the fees, but the phone isn't tying up the network.
There are plenty of ways to use data besides surfing the web. In fact that is probably one of the least data intensive ways to use a smartphone. Most of my data is probably from listening to spotify and pandora in my car while driving for example. Many games and other apps can also chew through data far more than just browsing the web.
It makes sense that these salespeople push Samsung. A larger commission is probably a major reason, but phone geeks are going to be naturally drawn to Android just because there is so much you can do in terms of customization. Not to mention the rooting and custom ROMs. The iPhone and iOS work well for what they do, but doesn't tend to appeal to phone geeks. I enjoyed custom ROMs when I had my HTC EVO, but grew tired of it after a while but still see the appeal to others. Jailbreaking is much easier than rooting, but when 6.1 is finally released I will do it again because I miss all that flexibility and features not available of vanilla iOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme
So what, you ask? That very much depends on whether you are interested in stock prices or in quality products. And, if you ARE interested only in stock prices, are you interested in the long term or in the easily-manipulated short term?
I want Apple to have a CEO who is interested in quality products and long-term stock performance. Not in playing the game of lies you say Tim was "napping" on. I say that because quality products matter to me, and I'd say the same if I were shareholder, because I'd be investing for the long term, not playing the silly, irrational quarter-to-quarter game.
And if you look at the numbers, you'll be surprised to see that Apple's market share is doing great, their profit share is doing better, and their buyer satisfaction numbers are simply untouchable.
People would be naive to think that quality products and short term stock performance have no serious relationships. People need to realize, quality products don't come out just because a few very smart people sit together and create it. Incentives plays a huge part. If you're working for AAPL and you see the stock tumbled in a matter of months, your work ethics could be affected, your concentration could be affected, in fact you might even look for a new job. The whole company's productivity is in fact a function of the stock price (yes even in the short-term).
And yet, the iPhone 5 is still outselling the S3. Pretty incredible, seeing the disparity in the marketing of both phones, and how ahrd the S3 is being pushed by absolutely everyone.
Originally Posted by macxpress
What do the British know anyways....
Yea, take Sirs Jonathan Ive and Tim Berners-Lee for example...
Quote:
Originally Posted by winstein2010
In retail, higher commission is the single most powerful motivator for recommending one product over another. In a commoditized market like the PC's, manufacturers used all kinds of tactics to win market share: including higher margin or increased incentive to move a certain number of units. Some retailer even took $200 off a PC for signing up for two years of AOL. Many PC manufacturers gained market share in the short term but eventually went out of business or got bought out.
1990s references have little relevance today. They could have better retail margins as you mentioned. Maybe very little profit is there at the retail level on the iphone. We haven't seen what they pay wholesale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N.
Spifs and OEM kickbacks talk loudly. Apple does not play that game much. Samsung heavily.
If MS still wants to play in this game, they should consider it.
Your assumptions are stupid as they're assumptions. All it takes is greater profit at the retail level to make them push it. If it didn't meet the standards of the retail establishment, they wouldn't even carry the device. If you're buying through a carrier store, they're likely to push models within a class of products that aren't as heavily subsidized. In this case smartphones are the product class. If something is labeled as a smartphone in the US, you're locked into a data plan with the contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo
And so what if Samsung used cheater tactics?
What even constitutes a cheater tactic? There are many potential reasons. What if they use the iphone to drive foot traffic but the actual sale delivers little profit for the retailer? Would you still expect them to push it once you're in the store? Not everything has to be a huge conspiracy. It could be any combination of things.
iMessage is actually a money maker for UK telcos due to increased data usage and overcharges. UK smartphone tariffs generally come with thousands or unlimited SMS bundles.
This could that there are warehouses filled with Samsung devices which the carriers struggle to even give away. I know that on Thursday last week there were 50+ Samsung s3 handsets in stock at my local car phone warehouse vs 16 iPhone 5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso
And this surprises who?
Judging from the strong anti-Apple sentiment in the UK, I'm not surprised whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
And yet, the iPhone 5 is still outselling the S3. Pretty incredible, seeing the disparity in the marketing of both phones, and how ahrd the S3 is being pushed by absolutely everyone.
Is the iPhone5 outselling the S3 in the UK?
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07
This is a lie. We all know people bought Samsung because they love Android (and iOS is stale of course). Salesman has nothing to do with it.
True.
/s
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress
What do the British know anyways....
What's the matter? Did the nasty British empire steal your great-great Grandfather's lunch?
"What do the British know anyways...."
Well they know how to design 'all' of Apple's products (Jonathan Ive)...
as well as inventing the world wide web that you used to post that comment (Tim Berners-Lee)...
the electricity that powers your computer (Michael Faraday)...
and computers in general (Charles Babbage / Alan Turing).
;0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Judging from the strong anti-Apple sentiment in the UK, I'm not surprised whatsoever.
What "strong anti-Apple sentiment" would that be exactly? The UK is one of Apple's biggest markets outside the US.
So the big test is to see which of these stores pass the commission money onto their employees. I know that John Lewis's employees don't work on a commission basis. I'm not entirely sure about the rest - CPW definitely used to but I'm not sure if they still do.
I think it's more likely that the Samsung Galaxy III is what "phone geeks" like to use. I see it a lot of smartphone forums. If you're obsessed with smartphones (and you're being paid pretty poorlY) Android is attractive. It's a lot more customisable than the iPhone 5.
Moreover the press release is also saying:
"These results echo a mystery shopper survey which was conducted last summer across five sales outlets located in the Silicon Valley, California area. The results from that survey revealed that the best-represented brands, in terms of prominent displays, were Samsung and HTC. When it came to mobile phones recommended by the sales assistants in the various stores, Samsung was by far the best-represented vendor (...)"
So I can't wait to read the usual highly pondered and factual people speaking about the "anti-Apple sentiment" in California...
http://blogs.informatandm.com/8121/press-release-uk-retailers-recommend-samsung-products-ahead-of-apple/
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE
In the US you don't need a survey. Just walk into a busy iPhone carrier (AT&T, Verizon) and ask them what they recommend or listen to what they recommend to others.
Um, isn't that an example of a "survey"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJohnWhorfin
So painfully reminiscent of the early '90s, where in the few stores that sold Macs and PCs the salespeople would systematically steer Mac customers towards a PC because they were getting big commissions and incentives for selling PCs, and virtually nothing for selling Macs.
Apple's choice then to prioritize margins over market share backfired: PCs eventually gathered enough market share that the Mac became practically extinct and software was no longer developed for it.
I'm not saying that it's what's happening to Apple right now; but if they're not careful, it could very well happen soon. Watch out for "Android first" apps.
Sorry, but your history of personal computing is fiction, wildly inventive fiction.